After touching two patients’ breasts, state moves to revoke doc’s license, levy $10K fine

A state administrative judge is recommending a Live Oak physician be fined $10,000 and have his license revoked after finding that he inappropriately touched two of his female patients’ breasts.

In the 13-page recommended order, State Administrative Judge Yolanda Green acknowledged her recommendations were on the “the high end” of disciplinary scale and that she could have instead proposed that Brij Bhushan Manohar Rana have his license suspended for one year and that he pay a $5,000 fine.

But Green noted that Rana engaged in “inappropriate sexual misconduct involving two different women, nearly two years apart, which demonstrates the serious nature of (his) actions. As a result, to protect the safety and welfare of patients, the appropriate penalty for (Rana’s) violation is at the high end of the recommended discipline range,” she wrote in the order.

Rana has denied the allegations, which were made by patient “C.S.” and patient “A.O.” and said the women were trying to extort money from him. He also said hot flashes and medications were clouding the judgment of patient C.S. 

C.S. alleged that Rana inappropriately touched her breast on April 17, 2018 as she was leaving an examination room at the Urgent Medical Care (UMC) after seeking treatment for hot flashes.

According to the recommended order, following the visit, Rana walked C.S. from the examination room by placing his arm behind her back. “He then placed his other hand across her chest and grabbed her right breast,” the recommended ruling notes.

C.S. confided in her mother about the incident and took her mother to a previously scheduled doctor’s appointment. She then reported the incident to the police station where she filed a complaint against Rana. She did not file a complaint with the Florida Department of Health (DOH), though.

Two years later, patient A.O. went to UMC, which Rana owns with his physician wife, with complaints of a cough and a sinus infection. Rana conducted a physical examination of A.O. and checked her throat and lymph nodes with his hand. He also checked her lungs with his stethoscope. 

Following the visit, A.O. stood up to leave the room and extended her right arm to shake his hand. 

“A.O. testified that (Rana) continued to hold her right hand, and placed his left arm around the back of her left shoulder. He then released her right hand and placed it on her left shoulder. She testified that Respondent’s hand brushed across her right breast and squeezed her left breast. A.O. pushed his hand away from her breast and glared at him. She testified that she did not believe that (Rana) touching her breast was medical. Instead, she was certain that (Rana) grabbed her breast in a sexual manner,” the recommended order notes.

A.O. left the office and told a nurse, Ashley Mallory, what occurred. Mallory gave A.O. the contact information for the DOH and also encouraged A.O. to report what occurred.

A.O. heeded the advice and reported the incident to the DOH. She also told others, including her cousin and therapist. The following day she went to the Live Oak Police Department the following day to report the incident.

During the investigation, the LOPD officer working the case discovered the 2018 complaint from C.S.

At a June 6 hearing in state administrative court, Rana refuted the allegations of what had occurred.

Rana “testified that he believed A.O. and C.S. were working together and attempting to get money from him. He also testified he believed C.S. was adversely affected by hot flashes and medications she was taking,” the recommended order notes.

Rana also argued that A.O., who has filed a lawsuit against him, also gave different descriptions of the alleged touching.

Green acknowledged A.O. ‘s lawsuit should be taken into consideration when determining the validity of her testimony, but ultimately found that it wasn’t enough to discredit her testimony.

“Moreover, no credible evidence was presented to demonstrate why two witnesses would independently fabricate facts of this nature,” Green wrote in the recommended order.

“The fact that (Rana) had engaged in similar behavior nearly two years apart involving two different patients who were unfamiliar with each other, makes the testimony of the two patients that much more believable. The act of grabbing or touching the breast of a person in the same manner is too similar to be contrived by two different victims.”